Literature DB >> 30953844

Evaluation of multiple laboratory performance and variability in analysis of recreational freshwaters by a rapid Escherichia coli qPCR method (Draft Method C).

Tiong Gim Aw1, Mano Sivaganesan2, Shannon Briggs3, Erin Dreelin4, Asli Aslan5, Samuel Dorevitch6, Abhilasha Shrestha6, Natasha Isaacs7, Julie Kinzelman8, Greg Kleinheinz9, Rachel Noble10, Rick Rediske11, Brian Scull11, Susan Rosenberg12, Barbara Weberman12, Tami Sivy13, Ben Southwell14, Shawn Siefring15, Kevin Oshima15, Richard Haugland16.   

Abstract

There is interest in the application of rapid quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR) methods for recreational freshwater quality monitoring of the fecal indicator bacteria Escherichia coli (E. coli). In this study we determined the performance of 21 laboratories in meeting proposed, standardized data quality acceptance (QA) criteria and the variability of target gene copy estimates from these laboratories in analyses of 18 shared surface water samples by a draft qPCR method developed by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for E. coli. The participating laboratories ranged from academic and government laboratories with more extensive qPCR experience to "new" water quality and public health laboratories with relatively little previous experience in most cases. Failures to meet QA criteria for the method were observed in 24% of the total 376 test sample analyses. Of these failures, 39% came from two of the "new" laboratories. Likely factors contributing to QA failures included deviations in recommended procedures for the storage and preparation of reference and control materials. A master standard curve calibration model was also found to give lower overall variability in log10 target gene copy estimates than the delta-delta Ct (ΔΔCt) calibration model used in previous EPA qPCR methods. However, differences between the mean estimates from the two models were not significant and variability between laboratories was the greatest contributor to overall method variability in either case. Study findings demonstrate the technical feasibility of multiple laboratories implementing this or other qPCR water quality monitoring methods with similar data quality acceptance criteria but suggest that additional practice and/or assistance may be valuable, even for some more generally experienced qPCR laboratories. Special attention should be placed on providing and following explicit guidance on the preparation, storage and handling of reference and control materials. Published by Elsevier Ltd.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Draft method C; E. coli; QA; Recreational water; Variability; qPCR

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 30953844     DOI: 10.1016/j.watres.2019.03.014

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Water Res        ISSN: 0043-1354            Impact factor:   11.236


  4 in total

1.  Large-scale comparison of E. coli levels determined by culture and a qPCR method (EPA Draft Method C) in Michigan towards the implementation of rapid, multi-site beach testing.

Authors:  Richard Haugland; Kevin Oshima; Mano Sivaganesan; Alfred Dufour; Manju Varma; Shawn Siefring; Sharon Nappier; Brian Schnitker; Shannon Briggs
Journal:  J Microbiol Methods       Date:  2021-03-22       Impact factor: 2.363

Review 2.  A short history of methods used to measure bathing beach water quality.

Authors:  Al Dufour
Journal:  J Microbiol Methods       Date:  2021-01-06       Impact factor: 2.363

3.  Absolute quantification of E. coli virulence and housekeeping genes to determine pathogen loads in enumerated environmental samples.

Authors:  K B Hoorzook; T G Barnard
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2021-11-29       Impact factor: 3.240

4.  Simplified Analysis of Measurement Data from A Rapid E. coli qPCR Method (EPA Draft Method C) Using A Standardized Excel Workbook.

Authors:  Molly J Lane; James N McNair; Richard R Rediske; Shannon Briggs; Mano Sivaganesan; Richard Haugland
Journal:  Water (Basel)       Date:  2020-03-11       Impact factor: 3.103

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.